What’s Labour got up its sleeve?

20 comments on “What’s Labour got up its sleeve? ”

• Comments are now closed

1. gingercrush 1

   1 April 2009 at 7:19 am

   Why is Bennett making a mockery of question time? I think Labour was able to do that for nine year themselves under two speakers and rarely applied the rules and thought everything answered the questions. Lockwood Smith is a Saint in comparison.
   • Killinginthenameof 1.1

     1 April 2009 at 9:02 am

     It was mainly Nationals complete and utter disgusting disrespect for Wilson that was the problem, they were the ones dragging it down.
     • Graeme 1.1.1

       1 April 2009 at 9:29 am

       Not really.

       Question time would usually go something like this:

       N: Can the Minister confirm that ACC is facing a massive funding shortfall and will have to raise premiums by 30% in each of the next three years just to cover costs?

       L: What I can confirm is that the National Party receives massive funding from the insurance industry and the member’s question was just cover in National’s plans to privatise ACC.

       N: Point of order, the minister did not address the question:

       S: I was listening closely, the minister was asked a question about ACC, so the answer did address the question. I would remind the member that I am responsible for applying standing orders, I am not responsible for the quality of answers.
       • George Darroch 1.1.1.1

         1 April 2009 at 1:00 pm

         Thanks Graeme. That was pretty much it.

         I wanted to kill Wilson every time she spoke. At least Hunt had the defence of being from the old guard, a relic from the 1970s. I thought that once he left things would improve. They didn’t.

         Labour people I spoke to thought that this style of question time was just fine. I thought it was an insult to democracy, and an insult to the people of New Zealand who deserve accountability from their Government. Lockwood Smith is doing a wonderful job in comparison. Although that isn’t hard…
         • Chris G 1.1.1.1.1

           1 April 2009 at 7:23 pm

           bollocks ginger and George… Go read question time now and Lockwood often shuts down labours points of orders using a similar response.

           ‘Saint’ you reckon! hah!
2. Tigger 2

   1 April 2009 at 8:41 am

   One would wonder why, since Worth has been in Parliament since 1999, he shows up as a consultant on this SG directory dated in 2007…conflict of interest much?

   http://www.simpsongrierson.com/assets/publications/source/August07/SG0018_49_directory.pdf
   • Graeme 2.1

     1 April 2009 at 9:32 am

     How? What interest did Worth have that could have conflicted?

     Note, that I’m not saying he didn’t have one, but a conflict of interest arises in a particular situation. Did Worth vote on legislation, or ask a Parliamentary Question for the advantage of SG (or one of it’s clients?). As a Minister, did Worth funnel legal work to SG? etc.

     The mere fact that someone holds to rolls will not automatically mean that there is a conflict of interest (some obviously will very easily, Chairman of Air NZ, on the Board of Auckland Airport – obvious conflicts will arise, etc.
     • Tigger 2.1.1

       1 April 2009 at 10:06 am

       Perception matters for one (as Worth is learning). How often did National play the perception card to their advantage.

       And two, given SG’s serpentine relationships in business and government, it will be hard to imagine there hasn’t been some conflict of interest issue arisen for Worth in the last decade and Worth has shown he is a doofus in dealing with these.

       Further, I’m not a fan of MP’s taking paid work anywhere else, not just Worth but any of them. Private businesses are one thing, working for someone else while the public pays your salary is another.
       • Graeme 2.1.1.1

         1 April 2009 at 11:09 am

         Yes, perception matters, but the perception still has to arise in a particular context.
3. Inventory2 3

   1 April 2009 at 9:06 am

   Isn’t it funny how you guys squeal now that the boot is on the other foot? What was it that Cullen said last year? “This is a contest about power in New Zealand”. Harden up folks 🙂
4. Schwule 4

   1 April 2009 at 9:19 am

   “What’s Labour got up its sleeve?’

   Is Trevor Mallard going to unleash another hay maker in Parliament?
5. Graeme 5

   1 April 2009 at 9:40 am

   Trevor Mallard has repeatedly asked him specific questions about who stopped the ACC chairman coming to the select committee and who decided Nick Smith would come instead. All Bennett says is “The members of that committee will be very thankful they had the Minister there. The fact that the Minister was there is something the members of the Labour Party should be very appreciative of.’ Bennett is making a mockery of Question Time and Lockwood Smith should put a stop to it.

   Lockwood Smith *is* doing something about it. I was listening to the end of question time, and know questions to members have got at most one supplementary question is the past. On the first one yesterday, there were four, and they were all the same.

   Bennett was wasting government legislative time, and being made to look like an idiot. What Lockwood was doing was saying was ‘that wasn’t a real answer, so I’m going to let him have another go, and another and another’. Bennett will get the message, these are questions to members and they are unlimited each day, and when Mallard puts down what were his supplementaries yesterday, as *primary* questions today, there should be answers.
6. Tanya 6

   1 April 2009 at 10:01 am

   Question Time yesterday was great fun, with pretty evenly matched MP’s on both sides of the House, they all give as good as they get, my favourites though are Judith Collins, Clayton Cosgrove, Nick Smith and Charles Chavel, because they are the staunchest, funniest and most entertaining. Lockwood Smith is more relaxed as speaker now, and never ever screeches, such a gentleman, he will be hard to beat in the future.
   • gingercrush 6.1

     1 April 2009 at 10:05 am

     Charles Chuvel is destined for the front bench. Of those who consistently ask questions I’d rate him as tops. The guy is madly talented.
   • Felix 6.2

     2 April 2009 at 8:03 am

     Tanya and ginger,

     If that’s the only level on which you can understand parliament then fuck off and watch some sports or shortland street.
7. jtuckey 7

   1 April 2009 at 11:25 am

   Agreed he is one of the more talented MPs in parliament – although often it ain’t hard to outshine some of the dullards in the house.
8. randal 8

   1 April 2009 at 1:49 pm

   back on topic there will be no labour party until they get the idea that the media has become totalitarian and will only publish the mangement point of view
   the newspapers and tee vee are beginning to resemble the right wing equivalent of Pravda and Trud from a bygone era but the same intent is there
   squash all discussion
9. gingercrush 9

   1 April 2009 at 7:46 pm

   Chris G – Its you who is speaking bollocks. In no way are Lockward Smith and Margaret Wilson similar in any way. Smith is a far better speak. Better than Hunt too. I do read question time I also watch Question Time. Please point to the evidence where Smith is doing anything near what Wilson use to get up to.
   • Felix 9.1

     2 April 2009 at 8:07 am

     It was pointed out in the other thread and as usual you put you fingers in your ears and went LALALALALALA.

     The reference was to Bennett’s refusal to answer Mallard’s questions on tuesday and Smith’s refusal to insist that they be answered.

Links to post

1. Mayday Mayday, Worth’s bought it and I’m losing altitude - Groser out at The Standard: posted on 1 April 2009 at 6:05 am

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS